Please use this thread for comments about the BBC’s current programming and activities. This post will remain at or near the top of the blog – scroll down for new topic-specific posts. N.B. this is not an invitation for general off-topic comments, rants or chit-chat. Thoughtful comments are encouraged. Comments may be moderated. Any suggestions for stories that you might like covered would be appreciated!
General BBC-related comment thread:
Bookmark the permalink.
Alan:
The Avram Grant story’s been on my UK page all day. […] It appears in Sports Headlines. (Grant is best known as a football manager).
Hillhunt | 21.02.08 – 12:45 am |
Followup, “Israeli MP blames quakes on gays” is still on Mid-East front page.
Even the article acknowledges that gay-right legislation in Israel is among the most advanced in the West (adoption, etc.)
Yet this article’s title willfully misrepresents the state of affairs in Israel.
And, what is more shocking – BBC carries ABSOLUTELY NOTHING ON THIS:
http://www.irqo.net/
It might be interesting to contrast the prominence given to this over the coming days:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/europe/7256045.stm
“Call for MEPs’ cash fraud probe”
with the treatment already given to this story:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/7212990.stm
“Tory MP Conway says ‘I’m sorry'”
My money’s on the MEP story not being followed up.
Martin wrote;
“Emily Maitlis interviewed some liberal prat who trie dto claim that it is in retaliation for a Chinese missile that shot down a Chinese satellite as a test and that there was (rightly) outrage at the time as the Chinese sent debris back into orbit.”
While I didn’t watch Newsnight , I have been following the BBCs coverage of this shoot down;
US ‘confident’ over satellite hit
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/americas/7256741.stm
US missile strike divides opinion
There have been suggestions that the US did this as a reply to the Chinese who brought down a satellite at a much higher altitude in January 2007.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/americas/7256531.stm
I too have notice how the BBC merely uses this event in which to attack the US (yet again) while the last link does point in the direction of the truth it doesn’t mention that the Missile used (Standard Block 3 missile) can only be used in the atmosphere
(Ceiling 100 miles) http://www.designation-systems.net/dusrm/m-161.html and not in space.
Which at a stroke disables the anti sat angle as the vast majority of Satellites are in a geostationary orbit and that can only be achieved at a height of over 22,300 miles. (Clark Orbit) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Geostationary
So why have the Russians and Chinese got their knickers in a twist over this? Because the Yanks have just proven that the last link in their (Naval) anti-missile system works. Oh janes Defence in its year run down wrote about the Chinese missile shoot, but stated that the technology used was 2 decades behind that of the US. Which did the same trick in 1985 using an F15 as the launch vehicle. (in other words a much smaller missile) and hit its target at a much higher altitude.
As for leaving it and allowing it to hit Mecca. Not sure where I read this, but I was under the impression that Ireland was in the impact area.
Once again, it’s clear that left wing bias is far more of a problem with BBC editors than with the journalists. This
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/business/7254320.stm
is a reasonably fair summary of Cuba’s economic history since Castro took power which, give or take a couple of poorly chosen phrases, makes it pretty clear that the Cuban economy has gone from basket case propped up by Soviet subsidies (low living standards) to basket case not propped by Soviet subsidies (very low living standards) to basket case propped up by Chavez subsidies (low living standards.) The article also explains that • from one point of view • there may in the past have been compensations for the basket case nature of the economy, in the form of national pride etc.
But the BBC Americas webpage editor has, bizarrely, decided to link to this story thus :
“What’s left • the decline and fall of Cuba’s once proud socialist economy”
even though the article itself makes it perfectly clear that Cuba’s socialist economy (since Castro came to power) has never been “proud.” It’s always been a failure.
The BBC, its coverage of possible violence in Kosovo and its coverage of actual violence in Denmark.
The BBC has spared no effort in knocking up headlines of possible violence from the Serbs against the Ethnic Albanians in Kosovo.
Serbs gather for Kosovo protest
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/europe/7256158.stm
Tense confusion on new Kosovan border
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/europe/7256549.stm
Nato troops close Kosovo border
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/europe/7252874.stm
Which in my book is your average bog standard news reporting . What isn’t is the veil the BBC has drawn over the riots in Denmark which last night ran at the 10th night in a row.
http://www.iht.com/articles/ap/2008/02/20/europe/EU-GEN-Denmark-Unrest.php
But not only that while the BBC demonises the Serbs for losing their Holyland. (Kosovo is to the Serbs what Mecca is to Muslims) They don’t even mention this Bomb attack in Denmark yesterday.
http://politiken.dk/indland/article474017.ece
I quote from the article
“Two young men between the ages of 20 and 25 were seen running away from the crime scene; they were described as “foreign-looking” and are now wanted by the police.”
Strange as the BBC makes no mention of this bomb attack, which from the photo was a lethal attack. I wonder why?
The BBC, its coverage of possible violence in Kosovo and its coverage of actual violence in Denmark.
Sorry forgot the English Versions for that Danish article;
http://jp.dk/uknews/article1272723.ece
http://www.cphpost.dk/get/105752.html
Picking up on Barry Wood’s excellent point about the BBC’s reluctance to come clean on the numbers on immigration, there was another good example last night on Newsnight. They introduced a discussion with a standard BBC intro piece which talked about changes in the electorate’s perception of immigration (3% thought it was a big issue in 1997, 46% think so now) as if it was all just a matter of the electorate’s feelings changing. At no point did they choose to mention that the immigration rate has gone up by a factor of ten since 1997, and that as a consequence several million additional foreigners have turned up to live here since 1997. Which might possibly explain the electorate’s new found interest in the subject. The panel discussion was the usual stuff. On the right, we had a soggy Conservative local government councillor whose sole interest seemed to be that central government was not providing enough money to local government to cope with extra demands on services. In the centre we had a Labour government spokesman, and on the left we had a migrants rights bloke. Which is pretty much par for the course. (No sign of a BNP spokesman, obviously.)
There was a particularly amusing bit where the BBC hackette said that immigration had once been a taboo subject (because complaining about immigration would be equated with racism) but now that a large chunk of immigrants were Christian whites from Eastern Europe the taboo had gone. She was, of course, perfectly right. But she neglected to mention that the BBC itself has long been the chief policer of the “people who say they’re concerned about immigration are really racists” taboo.
God this place is getting tiresome with all these poxy BBC trolls.
What happened to all the countless links to BBC bias that this place used to be full of? Now it’s turning into one big playground for the Beeboids.
And Hillhunt, you seriously need to get some help or some medication.
I’m going to do a Sarah Jane now. Declare loudly and repetively that I intend to leave this place for a short while as it has become annoying, stick around for a few more threads, piss off for 3 days and then come back and post like nothing ever happened.
Good luck y’all!
Lee Moore writes;
“There was a particularly amusing bit where the BBC hackette said that immigration had once been a taboo subject (because complaining about immigration would be equated with racism) but now that a large chunk of immigrants were Christian whites from Eastern Europe the taboo had gone.”
Personally I found that it was after the news that the failed bombers a fortnight after the London tube bombings were all immigrants given sanctuary in the UK. That the gloves came off in the (until then) forbidden subject of Immigrants. People questioned why are we allowing people who hate us to remain in this country. (usually at our expense) Only the otherday the Express (Yes it’s a rightwing paper) reported on how Khan of chopping off a Muslim soldiers head was living off benefits to the tune of £22 grand a year.
“the British taxpayer has been subsidising the lifestyle of this monster. Before his arrest Khan was receiving no less than £424 a week or £22,000 a year in benefits. Despite his loathing for our country, he was all too eager to leech off our funds, even bringing his mother here from Pakistan so he would be entitled to yet more social security. Far from being ashamed of his rank hypocrisy, Khan made a virtue of his cynical exploitation of our generosity. In his twisted mindset, spongeing was transformed into a religious duty.“Muslims live here for one reason – to get the wealth and give it to Muslims,” he said. By living among the British, he added, “we are going to make them bleed financially.”
http://www.dailyexpress.co.uk/posts/view/35549
As much as the BBC likes to promote a racist state for Muslims living in the UK. The fact that fields of Blood haven’t arisen in the UK (since those bombings) pays testimony to the fact that Britain is a very liberal and understanding country. Now contrast our behaviour with that of every Muslim country in the world (including Denmark) over a few cartoons.
Silly me the BBC rewrites all the news from Denmark as one of Islam victimhood.
Hillhunt | 21.02.08 – 12:52 am | #
“pounce’s psycho moment:
Here’s what I said of pounce’s 2007 psycho post earlier on this thread:
He called for a direct bomb attack on BBC staff and on the schools their children use.
Here’s what the man himself writes just above:
It was about how would the parents at the BBC feel if a bunch of militants decided to conduct a peaceful protest at a school in London like they did in Beslan.
Not very far apart…”
And that, not very far apart, Hillhunt, tells us everything we need to know about your powers of textual analysis.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/europe/7256045.stm
Presumably the EU will be asking for their loans back?
The BBC, victim hood status for Muslims in the Uk and half the story.
MP was bugged twice, report says
A Labour MP was bugged on two visits to see a constituent in prison, the home secretary has told the Commons.
Jacqui Smith was relaying the findings of an inquiry into the recording of Sadiq Khan at a jail in Milton Keynes.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/7256421.stm
The BBC in usual dhimi mode uses a shock, Horror, gasp headline in which to air the findings of an inquiry of the friend of a Terrorist fund raiser which is strange as this is how the Mail reports the same story;
Scotland Yard cleared of bugging Muslim MP
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/pages/live/articles/news/news.html?in_article_id=517217&in_page_id=1770&ito=newsnow
Even the Guardian paints a different picture that that portrayed by the BBC;
Smith vows to end ‘confusion’ over bugging rules
http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/2008/feb/21/terrorism.uksecurity2
Yet the BBC leads with a Muslim victim headline. I wonder why?
The BBC, victim hood status for Muslims in the Uk and half the story.
The BBC those evil Tory councillors who live 180 miles away and half the story.
Council row over 180-mile move
A Kent councillor who has moved 180 miles outside her elected ward has insisted that she can still do her job.
Linda Oliver, of Shepway District Council recently moved from Hythe to Bath in Somerset for family reasons.
Her political opponents have called for her resignation, saying she cannot fully represent Hythe West residents.
But the Tory councillor said lots of people commuted to work and it was only a two-and-a-half hour trip to her ward.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/kent/7256243.stm
Yup those evil tories can’t be trusted in which run their wards from 180 miles away. (Actually I agree)
And here is a story about another councillor. (Guess which party?) who works away from home.
Costa councillor backed by MP (dated 4:02pm Tuesday 19th February 2008)
A COUNCILLOR who has been representing residents from Spain has received the support of his colleagues.
But many of his constituents in the Parks ward have never even heard of him. As reported in Saturday’s Adver, ****** councillor Barrie Thompson has been in Spain since the beginning of January and has not attended a council meeting since July.
He has been suffering from ill health and went to Spain, where his son is already living, to recuperate.But he told the Adver he had no intention of paying back any of his council expenses amounting to £7,429.
http://www.adver.co.uk/display.var.2053951.0.costa_councillor_backed_by_mp.php
Swindon councillor hasn’t attended meeting since July
A COUNCILLOR who has been representing residents from Spain has received the support of his colleagues.
But many of his constituents in the Parks ward have never even heard of him. ****** councillor Barrie Thompson has been in Spain since the beginning of January and has not attended a council meeting since July.
http://www.thisiswiltshire.co.uk/news/headlines/display.var.2054628.0.swindon_councillor_hasnt_attended_meeting_since_july.php
The BBC those evil Tory councillors who live 180 miles away and half the story.
Stiletto wrote: ”
Hillhunt” posted at least 23 times or so starting at 12:20 in the afternoon and ending at 12:52 in the morning.
“John Reith” posted some 22 times.”
Stiletto – get a wheelie mouse. I scroll right over the Beeboid tossers’ contributions. Works wonders.
The BBC rendition apologies and half the story.
UK apology over rendition flights
David Miliband has admitted two US ‘extraordinary rendition’ flights landed on UK territory in 2002. The foreign secretary said in both cases US planes refuelled on the UK dependent territory of Diego Garcia.
….
In a statement CIA director Mike Hayden said neither of the two men “was ever part of CIA’s high-value terrorist interrogation program” He added: “These were rendition operations, nothing more. There has been speculation in the press over the years that CIA had a holding facility on Diego Garcia. That is false. There have also been allegations that we transport detainees for the purpose of torture. That, too, is false.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/7256587.stm
And here is the story of what really transpired;
“CIA Director Michael Hayden acknowledged Thursday that two rendition flights carrying terror suspects refuelled on British territory, despite earlier U.S. claims that no such flights had used British airspace or soil since the Sept. 11 attacks.
Hayden told agency employees that information previously provided to the British “turned out to be wrong.”
The spy agency reviewed rendition records late last year and discovered that in 2002 the CIA had in fact refuelled two separate planes carrying two terror suspects on Diego Garcia, a British island territory in the Indian Ocean.
“The refueling, conducted more than five years ago, lasted just a short time. But it happened. That we found this mistake ourselves, and that we brought it to the attention of the British government, in no way changes or excuses the reality that we were in the wrong. An important part of intelligence work, inherently urgent, complex, and uncertain, is to take responsibility for errors and to learn from them,” Hayden stated in the message obtained by The Associated Press.”
http://www.iht.com/articles/ap/2008/02/21/america/NA-GEN-US-CIA-Rendition.php
So who just broke this news, the Americans or the Brits? Not that the BBC informs you thus promoting this vision of American secrecy.
As for this cheap BBC comment;
“BBC world affairs correspondent Paul Reynolds said the revelations were “a serious embarrassment for the British government”
Oh please with the sanctimonious cod’s wallop. The vote over the EU, the NHS, Immigration, Foreign prisoners not getting deported, Youth crime, rising taxes are all examples of this Governments serious embarrassments. A couple of terrorist wannabes going on a plane flight isn’t. Unless of course you are a tofueatinglattedrinkingHezbollahplacard waving BBC hippy.
The BBC rendition apologies and half the story.
More bias from the BBC concerning the needless bashing of the Conservative party here: http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/business/7257073.stm
“Nic Howell, deputy editor of industry magazine New Media Age, said the site was no longer as popular among its core audience of young people.
“Social networking is as much about who isn’t on the site as who is – when Tory MPs and major corporations start profiles on Facebook, its brand is devalued, driving its core user base into the arms of newer and more credible alternatives,” he said. ”
Why take a quote from someone who clearly hates the Conservatives? Why couldn’t you take a quote from me, where I would happily have replaced the word Conservative with Green, Liberal Democrat or Labour? They didn’t because the BBC reporter is only friends with leftwing moonbats who read the Guardian. Bias is rife at the BBC.
The BBC, and its two versions of shooting down that wayward satellite.
Version 1 currently found on the BBC tech page;
US missile hits ‘toxic satellite’ (Thursday, 21 February 2008, 11:16 GMT)
The US has successfully struck a disabled spy satellite with a missile fired from a warship in waters west of Hawaii, military officials say. Operatives had only a 10-second window to hit the satellite – USA 193 – which went out of control shortly after it was launched in December 2006.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/americas/7254540.stm
Version 2 currently found on rest of BBC web site;
US ‘confident’ over satellite hit (Thursday, 21 February 2008, 14:16 GMT)
The US is confident that its shooting down of a disabled spy satellite with a missile managed to destroy its potentially toxic fuel tank. Marine Gen James Cartwright said there was a 80-90% chance that the satellite’s tank had been destroyed.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/americas/7256741.stm
Now I know the BBC likes to report the news. But two contradicting articles on the same story by the same News room?
(Strange how neither links into the other)
And the idiots at the BBC want to know where to save money.
The BBC, and its two versions of shooting down that wayward satellite.
Hmm, there are an awful lot of people realising that when China fired an anti-satallite missle into space last year there was no sudden hyperbole Have Your Say on the BBC effectviely asking this question of them, as they seem to do to the US?
“Could the shooting down of a satellite lead to a space arms race?
The United States has successfully fired a missile to shoot down a disabled spy satellite in space. Should this raise concerns?
The controversial mission has been criticised by Russia and China, amid concerns the operation was a cover to test anti-satellite technology.
The United States denies it acted in response to an anti-satellite test carried out last byear by China, which prompted fears of a space arms race.
Should the world be concerned at this latest action? Are fears that it may herald the start of a space arms race realistic?”
The BBC, how it is anti-american, and yet more evidence of institutional bias. If you ask this question of the US, ask this question of the Chinese please.
Following OFSTED’s multiculturalist propaganda on how even greater priority should be given to make students in England learn langauages like Bengali and Mandarin:
“Bengali and Mandarin should have same priority as French and German”
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/pages/live/articles/news/news.html?in_article_id=517113&in_page_id=1770
-The BBC, which spends millions of pounds of licence-payers’ money, on providing Asian languages for immigrants, leaps in with even stronger multiculturalist propaganda on the same report:
“Community languages ‘lack status'”
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/education/7255493.stm
And of course the BBC is in like a a shot with one of its ‘HYS’ pro-multiculturalist bent questions on that site. Note: the way the BBC reserves the word ‘community’ here for non-white, non-immigrant minorities.
The BBC makes no criticism of the Ofsted proposal in the light of the Labour Government’s statement of only a few days ago, when the ‘reliable’ and ‘convincing’ Hazel Blears said that the English language should get priority. Note how woolly she is on ‘multiculturalism, which she doesn’t discuss head-on.
(Here with A. Marr):
http://news.bbc.co.uk/player/nol/newsid_7240000/newsid_7249300/7249334.stm?bw=bb&mp=wm&news=1&nol_storyid=7249334&bbcws=1
Memo for H.Blears and BBC on MULTICULTURALISM, see:
“The Absurdities of Multiculturalism”
(by Ralph S. Musgrave)
http://www.multiculturalbunk.com/
Pounce
“tofueatinglattedrinkingHezbollahplacard waving BBC hippy.”
Absolutely brilliant.
I was surprised but pleased to see the BBC writing on islamic apostasy.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/middle_east/7250532.stm
Unfortunately “fraught with difficulty” hardly begins to cover it.
In BBC world: one case in Afghanistan is mentioned and that Iran is considering bringing in the death penalty for it. The usual no compulsion in religion is mentioned (arguable this has been “abrogated” anyway). Then we are told scolars are divided between those that favour the death penalty and those that say the punishment will come from allah on judgement day.
In the real world: The four major Sunni and one major Shia Madh’hab (schools of Islamic jurisprudence) agree that a sane adult male apostate must be executed. They differ on the punishment for a female apostate – some schools calling for death and others for imprisonment. Whether Sharia laws governing apostasy are derived from the hadith traditions alone or also from the Quran is disputed. According to Wael Hallaq nothing of the apostasy law are derived from the Qur’an, although the jurist al-Shafi’i interpreted the Quranic verse [Qur’an 2:217] as providing the main evidence for apostasy being a capital crime in Islam. A minority of medieval Islamic jurists, such as Hanafi jurist Sarakhsi,Maliki jurist Ibn al-Walid al-Baji, and Hanbali jurist Ibn Taymiyyah, and some contemporary Islamic jurists, such as Shafi`i Grand Mufti Ali Gomaa and Shi’a Grand Ayatollah Hossein-Ali Montazeri, argued or issued fatwas that either the changing of religion is not punishable or is only punishable under restricted circumstances, but these minority opinions have not found broad acceptance among the majority of Islamic scholars. Most Islamic scholars agree that the appropriate punishment for apostasy is beheading, however apostates sometimes were tortured to death.
The list of those killed for apostasy from islam is very very very long, but recently alone includes cases in Turkey, Nigeria, Palestine, Pakistan, Indonesia, Somalia, Iraq, Kenya, Afghanistan, Iran and more.
I suppose at least some mention of the “difficulties” is better than the BBC’s previous attempt asking those who have converted from islam to come forward and publicise themselves.
John Reith brings so much credit to the BBC, imagine him working on the Complaints counter at Harvey Nicks.
“These programmes are frequently broadcast simultaneously with the BBC’s, you complete and utter halfwit.”
I’m sure he is a plant by Sky/
“There are no available factual programmes on BBC News” – They said it…
http://notasheepmaybeagoat.blogspot.com/2008/02/there-are-no-available-factual.html
Stiletto:
@ MattLondon | 20.02.08 – 5:00 pm
Of course all Governments wanted to control the Unions,
I thought that was what we were disagreeing about!
Searching For Evidence.
Ibn Warraq, as you will know, is an ex-Muslim, and a leading critic of Islam.
He’s written many books. Here’s a sample article:
“Ibn Warraq on How to Debate a Muslim”
(Perhaps the BBC will invite him to do a series, to counter the pro-Islamic one which Rageh Omaar did for the BBC before he walked out, to join the pro-Islamic Al Jazeera.)
http://www.challenging-islam.org/articles/warraq-debate-muslims.htm
Can the mods please put up a thread for the BBC Panorama programme that is on next week?
There is going ot be a shit storm over this.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/pages/live/articles/news/news.html?in_article_id=517129&in_page_id=1811&ito=1490
You have to ask why the BBC hates our armed forces so much?
Could it be because
1. Most of them are white
2. Most are male
3. Most are working class
4. Most are not homosexual
5. Most are not “Moozlums”
6. Most don’t support Nu Labour
The BBC sees them all as baby killers.
“MEP fraud claims to face scrutiny”
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/europe/7256045.stm
And:-
“It’s not secret – it’s confidential”
http://eureferendum.blogspot.com/2008/02/its-not-secret-its-confidential.html
A suggested BBC ‘HYS’:
‘ Should these claims of MEP fraud affect the overall enthusiasm which the British people have for the democratic European Union?”
The BBC are doing their best to bury the news that the Lords have chucked out (parts of) the Northern Crock bill. On R4s 6 o’clock news it was not mentioned in the headlines and relegated to a tiny slot near the end of the half hour bulletin, when it was reported as dry as dust as the Lords making three “changes” to the bill. No mention of the word “defeat” of course. Makes a revealing contrast with the loud headlines when the Lords chuck out anything to do with terror legislation.
The BBC – not telling you the news – tis’ what we do.
@George R
Yes true, perhaps it should be entirely limited to islamic scholars.
“Scholars are divided” – way way over 90% of islamic scholars favour the death penalty for apostasy and in islamic countries the numbers for “ordinary” muslims will also be surprisingly high.
In most definitions to suggest this counts as divided is to stretch the truth so far as to be in reality untrue.
I thought the BBC had tired of the fat, fat, fat americans, fat line.
I am not diminshing the problem of overweight and obesity, I am quite sure it is a problem for those that suffer with it, but what is the BBC playing at?
They publish this
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/health/7256342.stm
But fail to link it to their own story from months ago
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/health/6547891.stm
European whites still make up the vast majority of people in the UK.
Doing the maths fromthe genes we would expect 1 in 2 to be overweight and 1 in 6 to be obese.
1 in 4 and 1 in 3 for overweight/obese is therefore low. But wait it was not compulsory, so obviously a number of obese children cried off, if I had been fat when I was young and they wanted to humiliate me with this weighing I would probably have refused to be weighed too.
Also perhaps very young children just haven’t had the time to add the weight on.
So for 1 in 3 at 11 it probably is nearer 1 in 2 as you would expect.
The improvement being sought is highly unlikely to come about till a solution to the genetic problem is discovered.
And apart from a few extreme examples I do not see an army of obese kids running the streets that were not there in previous generations.
Like man made global warming much of the obesity epidemic is flawed based on grossly exaggerrated figures.
Martin:
Can the mods please put up a thread for the BBC Panorama programme that is on next week?
There is going ot be a shit storm over this.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/pages…d=1811& ito=1490
You have to ask why the BBC hates our armed forces so much?
Why indeed.
Here’s a refreshing view on the individual behind it all.
Read it and weep – again:-
http://soldiersailorairmanroyalmarinescommando.co.uk/PhilipShiner.aspx
The daily dose of BBC Obama promo / anti Clinton bias. How blatant is this:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/thereporters/justinwebb/2008/02/follow_the_money.htmlcommentsanchor
His grasp of betting odds is a little shaky or his use of language somewhat odd:
“…and she’s now a massive 7/2 to win the Democratic nomination.”
Phil Shiner is an arsehole. A leach and of course Shami loves him. Say no more.
So a mob totaling “several hundred” attack numerous embassies in Serbia, one of which just happens to be the British Embassy, and our state media outlet leads with the headline “US Embassy in Belgrade Attacked”. I’m sure at this very moment NBC in the US are running with the story “UK Embassy in Belgrade Attacked”.
Lead item on Newsnight just now – two US planes carrying terror suspects may have refuelled at our base on Diego Garcia.
Kirsty in maximum “Squark” mode – “the shame! the infamy! we are all guilty – the special relationship’s over”.
You’d think they’d had Nelson Mandela and the bloody Pope onboard!
Obligatory interview with teenage girl Yumanrights lawyer from Clive Stafford Smith’s (Soros & Michael Moore funded) “Reprieve” circus.
I think most Americans are beginning to write off this country as a lost cause.
Dust off y’prayer mats folks.
BBC 2’s ‘Newsnight’ and the ‘whiff of arrogance’ on IMMIGRATION issue.
A perceptive observation at ‘New Culture Review’:-
“There was the usual whiff of arrogance here – i.e., that just because the liberal elite was finally taking on board that there might even be a problem, the ‘debate’ had thus become valid”:
http://www.newcultureforum.org.uk/home/?q=node/232
And the Labour Government’s weak announcement on Immigration allows mass immigration to continue into the UK:-
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/pages/live/articles/news/news.html?in_article_id=516408&in_page_id=1770
UK apology over rendition flights
is the BBC headline – which leads you to believe that the UK government is apologising for the fact of them. Rather than apologising for having failed to tell the correct story about them. It’s a small thing, but these small things all add up.
How VERY satisfying to see that the ‘Toxic Satellite’ story has been given a good few revisions – many of them as suggested on this site!
http://www.newssniffer.co.uk/articles/98969/diff/18/19
Chuffer | 22.02.08 – 8:21 am,
Great, now we need the BBC to stop playing coy and recognise the contribution we make to try to prevent the decline in its journalism.
Archbishop Williams, the BBC, their ‘multiculturalism’ and stages in the Islamisation of Britain:
1.)This is the BBC’s ‘multiculturalist’ profile of Yusuf AL-QARADAWI:
“Controversial preacher with ‘star status'”.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/3874893.stm
2.)In line with the Muslim Brotherhood strategy for the Islamic conquest of Europe:
“Qaradawi embraces Archbishop’s call for acceptance of Sharia Law in Britain” (Douglas Farah).
http://www.douglasfarah.com/article/316/qaradawi-embraces-archbishops-call-for-acceptance-of-sharia-law-in-britain.com
Has there been any BBC follow up of the EU fraud story ? – the one where a Lib Dem MEP was allowed to read an internal audit having first agreed to conditions of secrecy, and was so appalled that he has demanded a criminal investigation. He was interviewed on the Today programme (yesterday) and seemed very shocked (sweet, naive people these Lib Dems) – The Today interviewers seemed both less surprised at the story and a little embarassed that it came from a pro EU Lib Dem (though I don’t for a moment suppose that Daniel Hannan for example or any UKIP MEP would have been allowed any where near the original report) Surely this is a big story, much bigger than Conway, much bigger sums of money are involved . Why no cries of consternation? Are there no genuine liberals campaigning for freedom of information in the EU parliament?
la marquise | 22.02.08 – 11:49 am | #
I suggested yesterday that the apparent MEP fraud would not receive the prominence of Derek Conway. It seems I was correct, although to be fair I believe Newsnight had a go at it yesterday. Everywhere else, silence.
I noticed that the killer in last night’s Ashes to Ashes was a Christian nutcase. What would the writers use for inspiration if there were not such a dangerous religion as Christianity?
From the opening paragraph of this article, is the BBC ignoring this trend?:
“..expulsion of Christians from Arab countries”
http://memri.org/bin/latestnews.cgi?ID=SD185008
The BBC,Chinese whispers and half the story.
China defends arms sales to Sudan
China has defended its sale of weapons to Sudan, amid growing criticism of its alleged failure to help resolve the humanitarian crisis in Darfur. China’s special envoy on Darfur told the BBC that Beijing accounted for just 8% of Sudan’s total arms imports. Liu Guijin said the US, Russia and UK were the biggest arms exporters to developing countries including Sudan.
…..
“Sudan is the third largest conventional arms producer in Africa next only to South Africa and Egypt.
And there are seven countries selling arms to Sudan. So even if China stopped its sale, it still won’t solve the problem of arms in Sudan,” he said.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/asia-pacific/7258059.stm
The BBC conducts an interview with Chinas special envoy to Darfur and allows him to makes statements which for some reason the BBC doesn’t address?
So want to see a chart from the Stockholm International Peace Research Institute which explains just what weapons Sudan has bought in the last ten years?
http://img521.imageshack.us/img521/8569/image1mh3.jpg
The above is a list of every major weapon system bought by Sudan since 1997. Anybody from the BBC wish to pick out the UK or the US from that list?.
So what about that unanswered claim (so favoured by Tony (I ruined British industry) Benn.) That the US and Uk were the biggest sellers of arms to the developing world.
I collated a large number of developing countries and ran a search what they had bought in the last 10 years from 4 major arms suppliers as per that article;
The UK;
http://img403.imageshack.us/img403/8650/image12ex7.jpg
The US;
http://img403.imageshack.us/img403/6797/image4yf7.jpg
Now contrast that with what China sold that group;
http://img403.imageshack.us/img403/6687/image2sm2.jpg
and what Russia unloaded;
http://img403.imageshack.us/img403/3911/image3bf0.jpg
and Russia’s vassal state Belarus
http://img246.imageshack.us/img246/9355/image1ez2.jpg
All of the above searches were ran with the same countries. Yet visible differences can be seen in what has been sold. In a nutshell the Chinese and Russians supply a large number of developing countries around the world with weapons as they ask no questions about their use. The UK and US not only ask questions but stick to the rule book. Which may help explain how out of all those sales the only weapons system sold by the US and Uk to a developing country is a bunch of anti-aircraft missiles by the US. Sounds wrong doesn’t it. Have a look, if fact If you wish to conduct your own search on who sold weapons follow the link.
http://armstrade.sipri.org/arms_trade/trade_register.php
The BBC, Chinese whispers and half the story.
I can’t find this on the world’s leading (most expensive) broadcaster.
http://www.burnleycitizen.co.uk/display.var.2058610.0.boy_14_driven_off_and_beaten.php
With their all-encompassing regional news gathering teams, surely the BBC should be able to report kidnappings and beatings like this.
If they do cover it, I suspect their version to miss out some of the relevant facts.
Roland Deschain | 22.02.08 – 1:12 pm | #
Yes – I noticed that too. Incredible isn’t it? These Christian psychos are obviously one of the biggest dangers to humanity – in beeboid parallel universe …
ZZ, thanks for the link, typical Planet Beeboid bias by ommission
The BBC, Iran’s nuclear ambitions and half the story
Iran ‘nuclear questions remain’
The UN’s nuclear watchdog says it cannot provide “credible assurances” that Iran is not building a bomb despite new data supplied by Tehran.
………
But BBC diplomatic correspondent Jonathan Marcus says the IAEA findings are mixed at best and not the clean bill of health Iran had sought.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/middle_east/7259296.stm
In light of the above headline here’s a question the BBC hasn’t asked of the Iranian regime.
Iran doesn’t have a working nuclear reactor. So why is it enriching uranium when it doesn’t have any reactors to use them?
The BBC, Iran’s nuclear ambitions and half the story
I’m not quite ready to call this the usual BBC sweeping Islamic extremism in the UK under the rug. But this article is dancing close to the line:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/london/7257695.stm
Contrast the details of testimony revealed in the above BBC brief to those mentioned in this even shorter Mirror article:
http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/topstories/2008/02/21/islam-pig-claim-89520-20326421/
Now, aside from the fact that both articles mention “racist” curriculum at this Saudi-funded school in Acton, there is a significant difference in other details. I have no problem with the BBC giving the school’s rebuttal as “balance”, something the Mirror fails to do, but the BBC takes it one step too far.
Both the BBC and the Mirror report the claims of the usual anti-Christian and anti-Jewish teaching in at least one of the school’s textbooks. However, the Mirror goes on to say this:
“The head of King Fahad Academy denied the claims but shredded the 2,000 books.”
The BBC, on the other hand, only quotes a school mouthpiece with an English (non-threatening, not from an Islamic country) name, saying that Colin Cook can’t prove his claims. And at the very top of the article, the accompanying photo of the school gate has this caption:
“The King Fahad Academy has phased out the Saudi curriculum”
Big difference. I guess “phased out” is now a euphemism for “shredded” in the BBC style guide.
And before any Beeboids point me to the accompanying article from last year about the school “editing” the books, I’ve seen it. It’s not helpful at all as it says Ofsted admits that they didn’t look at all the textbooks, and the article doesn’t say anything about shredding.